Covert conversations: disciplined improvisation and meaning-making in the masters (MA) supervisory relationship

This research asks the question: “What are the relational dynamics in Masters (MA) supervision?” It does so by focusing upon the supervisory relationship itself. It does this through dialoguing with the voices of both MA supervisors and supervisees in the Humanities using a Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) framework. In so doing, this research argues for a re-evaluation of how MA supervision is conceptualised and proposes a new theoretical framework for conceptualising MA supervision as a relational phenomenon. The research design was derived from an Activity Theory-influenced methodology. Data collection procedures included the administration of Activity Theory Logs, individual semi-structured interviews with both supervisors and supervisees and the completion of reflective journals. Grounded Theory was used to analyse the data. The sample for the study consists of three supervisor-supervisee dyads from three disciplines in the Humanities. Data was collected over the course of one academic year, 2010-2011. This research found that both individual and shared relational dynamics play an important role in MA supervision. Individual dynamics, such as supervisors’ iterative negotiation of ambiguity/clarity and supervisees’ boundary work, revealed that both parties attempt to negotiate a separation between their professional-academic identities and personal identities. However, an inherent paradox emerged when the shared relational dynamics of MA supervision were investigated. It was found that the shared space created by the supervisory relationship did not only exist in a physical setting, but was also psychoactive in nature and held strong emotional resonances for both parties involved. This served to undermine the separation between professional-academic and personal identities. As a result, this research argues that the interaction between the individual and shared relational dynamics in MA supervision enables, for both supervisors and supervisees, a disciplined improvisation of academic identity.

Perceived occupational stress in nurses working in Ireland

Background: This study examines perceived stress and its potential causal factors in nurses. Stress has been seen as a routine and accepted part of the healthcare worker’s role. The lack of research on stress in nurses in Ireland motivated this study. Aims: The aims of this study are to examine the level of stress experienced by nurses working in an Irish teaching hospital, and investigate differences in perceived stress levels by ward area and associations with work characteristics. Method: A cross-sectional study design was employed, with a two-stage cluster sampling process. A self-administered questionnaire was used to collect the data and nurses were investigated across ten different wards using the Nursing Stress Scale and the Demand Control Support Scales. Results: The response rate was 62%. Using outpatients as a reference ward, perceived stress levels were found to be significantly higher in the medical ward, accident and emergency, intensive care unit and paediatric wards (p<0.05). There was no significant difference between the wards with regard to job strain, however, differences did occur with levels of support; the day unit and paediatric ward reporting the lowest level of supervisor support (p<0.01). A significant association was seen between the wards and perceived stress even after adjustment (p<0.05). Conclusion: The findings suggest that perceived stress does vary within different work areas in the same hospital. Work factors, such as demand and support are important with regard to perceived stress. Job control was not found to play an important role.